CO- Dylan Redwine, 13, Vallecito, 19 November 2012 - #22

[Flutterflies]

Here's what the Denver Post article said:

He has contacted a criminal-defense attorney

http://www.denverpost.com/frontpage/ci_22108222?source=rss

Can you recheck your link? When I click on your link it says "File not found."
Thanks

 

[nursebeeme]

I have to find the link but iirc mark redwine was questioned extensively during the search and he did not have an attorney present for that questioning.

As for when he decided to advise with counsel.. I believe someone just posted that above. (the above link was a upi article sourcing out to the denver post so perhaps the denver post article is the one that has the original wording)

The rest seems to be reporting semantics.

I will check the timeline and see if I can find anything else

[ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showpost.php?p=8594794&postcount=29"]Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - View Single Post - CO CO - Dylan Redwine, 13, Vallecito, 19 Nov 2012 *Media , Maps & Timelines*[/ame]

here is the link to the post that has several media articles with links (original articles)

Shupe is also quoted re: attorney and the fact that none was present during the questioning.

 

[nursebeeme]

Can you recheck your link? When I click on your link it says "File not found."
Thanks

I was able to open it....

 

[The Cheese]

Number of children

abducted in US each year approx: 258,115

murdered by a parent or other family member in US each year approx: 250 to 300

murdered by father or other family member (not mother) in US each year approx: 125 to 150

 

[nursebeeme]

So it appears that the UPI article changed the wording up. This is how things get all wonky. They are quoting their source as the Denver Post and the Post merely said HE CONTACTED A CRIMINAL LAWYER.

yes.... :twocents:

 

[scorekeeper]

are we getting a new thread here soon?

 

[LotusPawprint]

Originally Posted by LotusPawprint
AHHHHH........!!!!


Now I know who was NICE and who was NAUGHTY !

:blushing: :what:

Everyone has to have a hobby. Mine just happens to pay $2.99 per minute...

You're paying too much. :floorlaugh:

 

[oceanblueeyes]

but in this particular case something has occurred during the access visit, not at the childs home, so its different to many cases that had totally different circumstances surrounding them.

It isnt different to me as long as LE has abduction on the table. If they ever come out and rule that out then I will not consider it as a good possibility but until that happens I will listen to LE. So the abduction case study is very relevant to me.

Dylan was at his home......he has two homes.....one when he is with his mom and one when he is with his dad. The same home he came to back to on the Labor Day weekend.

What is different. Millions of children have divorced parents and the child will live with one parent and then come and stay with the other parent.

 

[Tennlyn]

So it appears that the UPI article changed the wording up. This is how things get all wonky. They are quoting their source as the Denver Post and the Post merely said HE CONTACTED A CRIMINAL LAWYER.

I also see that the Denver Post article was updated about 9 hours after originally posting, so it's possible that they changed that language. :moo:

 

[mmmagique]

You're paying too much. :floorlaugh:

:what: Seriously...*I* am not the one doing the paying. *lol*

Remember, you get what you pay for!

 

[mmmagique]

It isnt different to me as long as LE has abduction on the table. If they ever come out and rule that out then I will not consider it as a good possibility but until that happens I will listen to LE. So the abduction case study is very relevant to me.

Dylan was at his home......he has two homes.....one when he is with his mom and one when he is with his dad. The same home he came to back on the Labor Day weekend.

What is different. Millions of children have divorced parents and the child will live with one parent and then come and stay with the other parent.

He disappeared.

 

[Psychic Sleuth]

I also see that the Denver Post article was updated about 9 hours after originally posting, so it's possible that they changed that language. :moo:

And if they changed it from HIRED TO CONSULTED that would mean the first was in error and they corrected it. I hope he HIRED an attorney. Not sticking up for him in any way. I guess everyone has differing opinions of what hiring an attorney means. I would expect anyone in similar shoes to hire one and I would not automatically assume that screams guilt. To me that screams 'smart'. When you don't have an attorney to explain the law to you and what your legal rights are you are basically 'fair game' to LE. Not putting LE down in any way, that's just the way the law works.

 

[aust amateur slueth]

It isnt different to me as long as LE has abduction on the table. If they ever come out and rule that out then I will not consider it as a good possibility but until that happens I will listen to LE. So the abduction case study is very relevant to me.

Dylan was at his home......he has two homes.....one when he is with his mom and one when he is with his dad. The same home he came to back to on the Labor Day weekend.

What is different. Millions of children have divorced parents and the child will live with one parent and then come and stay with the other parent.

LE have stated that its a criminal investigation, IMO if they thoguht it was an abduction they would be a lot more vocal about the case in the media.

the difference is how many of those children of divorced parents disappear from their NCP's home don't you think?

it is not Dylans usual place of residence.

 

[The Cheese]

Original LE (Dan Bender) quote from November 29th on criminal investigation:

"We've been doing a potential criminal investigation, looking at abduction, kidnapping or foul play. We haven't closed out the possibility he has run away and we're still going door to door. We have an absence of clues. It's a mystery, that's what makes it so frustrating," he said.

 

[Psychic Sleuth]

Original LE (Dan Bender) quote from November 29th on criminal investigation:

"We've been doing a potential criminal investigation, looking at abduction, kidnapping or foul play. We haven't closed out the possibility he has run away and we're still going door to door. We have an absence of clues. It's a mystery, that's what makes it so frustrating," he said.

That was Nov 29th. Didn't they later state that they didn't believe he ran away?

 

[LotusPawprint]

When LE conducts a search, they provide a receipt for items removed. It serves many purposes, they have a log of what was taken, the person who's home or auto or whatever has a record of what was taken and neither can later say, we found this here or you took this from my home and I want it back.

IMO MR consulted a criminal attorney after the search because something was on that receipt that he didn't want to be on there or something totally innocent but he thought it might implicate him.
Does anyone know if he actually retained an attorney or who the attorney was that he consulted?

IMO it makes a difference if you consult an attorney vs retaining an attorney.

bbm - That's an interesting thought/possibility.

In terms of everything LE is saying publicly about MR, *if* he is their POI, I highly doubt they would say anything to let on he is in fact their focus. I would imagine if he is in their sights they would try to keep him calm and cooperating, unaware of how much they have on him.

Either way MR knows the truth, it's just a matter of him knowing what LE knows or doesn't know.

LE isn't going to say they found something significant while executing the search warrant, but as you suggested with the itemized receipt - if there was something he didn't get back, he could figure things out.


IMO it's highly plausible that what LE is saying publicly (and what they AREN'T saying/doing publicly) may be to create a false sense of security for MR *if* they think he's involved, as they are more than happy to have his continued cooperation and hope it will continue until there are answers.

 

[Psychic Sleuth]

Of course at this point I don't think ANYONE believes he ran away. I think in the beginning that was a thought and a reasonable one.

 

[Psychic Sleuth]

bbm - That's an interesting thought/possibility.

In terms of everything LE is saying publicly about MR, *if* he is their POI, I highly doubt they would say anything to let on he is in fact their focus. I would imagine if he is in their sights they would try to keep him calm and cooperating, unaware of how much they have on him.

Either way MR knows the truth, it's just a matter of him knowing what LE knows or doesn't know.

LE isn't going to say they found something significant while executing the search warrant, but as you suggested with the itemized receipt - if there was something he didn't get back, he could figure things out.


IMO it's highly plausible that what LE is saying publicly (and what they AREN'T saying/doing publicly) may be to create a false sense of security for MR *if* they think he's involved, as they are more than happy to have his continued cooperation and hope it will continue until there are answers.

I think this may be right on! JMHO

 

[scorekeeper]

In a recent development, a bloodhound from New Mexico searched the same areas in Vallecito gone over earlier by search teams and dogs, KOAT-TV in Albuquerque reported.


The bloodhound, the station report said, can detect a scent up to 6 weeks old. But the dog turned up nothing.

http://durangoherald.com/article/20121226/NEWS01/121229694/0/SEARCH/Reward-for-Dylan-tips-at-$20000

To this date investigators have no new leads. They ruled out the possibility of Dylan running away and focused their efforts on a possible kidnapping or foul play. Despite the lack of new news, Dylan's mother Elaine isn't giving up hope.

http://www.9news.com/rss/story.aspx?storyid=306868

 

[LotusPawprint]

And if they changed it from HIRED TO CONSULTED that would mean the first was in error and they corrected it. I hope he HIRED an attorney. Not sticking up for him in any way. I guess everyone has differing opinions of what hiring an attorney means. I would expect anyone in similar shoes to hire one and I would not automatically assume that screams guilt. To me that screams 'smart'. When you don't have an attorney to explain the law to you and what your legal rights are you are basically 'fair game' to LE. Not putting LE down in any way, that's just the way the law works.

ITA. I really can't get on someone for hiring a lawyer and make a blanket generalization that consulting/retaining an attorney means guilt or innocence.

I'll just state right here that if I was brought in for questioning on something so petty as jaywalking I'd probably cry and ask for a lawyer. :blushing: I view it like going to a country with a foreign language and not having an interpretor.
It's your right and why the heck not, why choose to navigate a system you know nothing about while putting yourself at a disadvantage? But by all means, keep cooperating - especially if the goal is FINDING YOUR CHILD (if you're innocent)!